SIDDAMMA AND OTHERS Vs. VENKATASWAMY AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is defendants' second appeal challenging the judgment and decree dated 12.12.2001 passed in O.S. No. 234/1989 on the file of Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.), Hiriyur confirmed by judgment and decree dated 6.8.2002 in R.A. No. 36/2002 on the file of Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.), Chitradurga. For the sake of convenience the parties to this appeal are referred to by their rank before the trial Court.

(2.) BRIEF facts leading to this appeal are as under: Plaintiffs are owners of suit schedule properties having purchased the same from the members of family of Ugra Narasimhaiah. Defendants are the owners of property, which is situated adjacent to the suit schedule properties. The properties, which are part of this dispute are several bits of land situated in Alur village, Hiriyur Taluk. The said properties are situated to the east of V.V. Channel, which is running from north to south. On the eastern side of V.V. Channel there is existence of PWD Road which proceeds from south to north and takes a right turn towards east. On the eastern side of said road the properties of plaintiffs are situated which are suit schedule properties bearing Sy. Nos. 256/2, 324, 325, and 326. On the north of said properties there is remaining portion of 256/2, 330, 331, 329/1, 329/2, 332, 328 and 333. The entire property belonging to plaintiffs under the aforesaid survey numbers forms a compact block. To the immediate east of said properties the property belonging to defendants bearing Sy. Nos. 327, 336, 335 and 334 is situated. Location wise, properties of plaintiffs has a road on its western side between their property and V.V. Channel and also a road on its northern side, which is PWD road proceeding towards Tumkur. So far as defendants are concerned, property bearing Sy. No. 324 of defendants is facing PWD road proceeding from west to east and behind the said Sy. No. 334 Sy. Nos. 335, 336 and 327 is situated.

(3.) IN the proceedings, the defendants entered appearance, filed their written statement contending that plaintiffs predecessor in title, namely, Ugra Narasimhaiah and his family members who are not only owners of suit schedule properties and also other properties had utilised an abandoned Nakasha road, which was passing through properties belonging to the family of Ugra Narasimhaiah. The said road was proceeding from Alur to Yeraballi. The total extent of said road which was passing through properties of Ugra Narasimhaiah's family measured more than 1 acre and the said road was not being utilised by any one. Hence, when V.V. Channel was formed and the potentiality of land improved the abandoned Nakasha road was also utilised for cultivation by them. In this behalf a representation was given by villagers including father -in -law of 1st defendant which resulted in certain proceedings taking place, wherein the Tahsildar and Assistant Commissioner after holding enquiry with the parties had come to an arrangement wherein plaintiffs predecessor in title Ugra Narasimhaiah had agreed to leave a portion of his property for the benefit of defendants and other villagers to pass through the road to be formed in his property in Sy. No. 256/2, 324 to 326 so as to reach Sy. No. 327 and to reach the other lands beyond that as an alternate road.